Thoughts on: Intel(R) i7-2600 quad-core processor/Turbo-Boost [up to 3.8Ghz, 8MB cach
 

Old computer almost dead...thinking of this as a replacement:

HPE570t series
•Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 quad-core processor with Turbo-Boost [up to 3.8GHz, 8MB cache]
•8GB DDR3-1333MHz SDRAM [4 DIMMs]
•1.5TB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive
•1GB ATI Radeon HD 5770 [dual-link DVI, HDMI, DP, VGA adapter]

- A smaller die with 32nm fabrication process, which is clock for clock faster than the previous generation Nehalem processor or anything else on the market, while also having a low 95W TDP at idle and up to 163W.
- The new turbo boost dynamically activates and boosts 1-4 cores based on demand, UNTIL it reaches a temperature limit and will begin to clock down.
- Quick Sync technology integrates a dedicated portion of the processor within the processor solely for Encoding/Decoding Video, providing not only provides greater graphics performance but also uses less energy. Reviews put Sandy Bridges encode speed in an entirely different league, finishing encodes twice as fast as top of the line dedicated graphics cards, without much CPU usage. In terms of gaming graphics, it performs at least on-par with the HD 4550, capable of about 40fps at 1680x1050 (on the Intel HD 300 version) and surpasses it in some games.


I will be adding another 1.5TB drive for editing.

cost: $789

Is this a good deal or should I be looking at something else. I haven't read anything about the i7-2600 quad core with Turbo Boost. I'm editing AVCHD files using Vegas 9.

Although the new i7-2600 CPU helps, it's Vegas 9 itself that's going to be a weak point. It cannot take full advantage of all that RAM. And if you're still using the 32-bit version of Vegas 9, the program won't use more than about 3GB of RAM total.

And speaking of that HPE570t, HP has disabled all of the Turbo and "limited overclock" features - which means that the i7-2600 CPU will be permanently stuck at stock multipliers (3.4GHz maximum). It is one thing to have overclocking capability, however limited - but then it's something else to have a big-name OEM shoot itself in the foot by permanently disabling such a feature.

ive heard bad things about every 1.5 tb drive

I'm not familiar with the processor, but on the surface it sounds pretty nice. With Vegas the processor is EVERYTHING!

If you haven't already, research the heck out of the chip

I would say that the HP machine will have virtually no expandability, and a small power supply, so you cannot run an inifinite # of external hard drives. Your power supply and the case will severely limit any attempts at expansion.

Otherwise, for the money, it sounds pretty good, at least for the processor.

Many of us here build our own. For example, when I upgrade, I will only need to swap out the motherboard, ram and processor and I'll be done. I'm not a huge fan of prebuilt, mainly because you are SO restricted. But if you are OK with it, cool.

The processor is supposed to be very good for video. If it is in your price range, and you cannot afford any more, go for it.

If you shoot onto tapes, make sure you have a firewire connection on the case! Most PCs don't have them any more!

"ive heard bad things about every 1.5 tb drive"

I currently have a pair of 1.5 tb Seagate drives, plus several that I connect with USB for backup. They are all a couple of years old (March, 2009, to be exact). Never had any problems yet, although, as I recall.

It is true that some Seagate 1.5tb drives had to have firmware updates to avoid freezing. Maybe that's where the bad press comes from . . .

And because of the HP's seriously cramped case, poor case airflow and low-quality PSU, it's not surprising that HP has permanently disabled the Turbo feature in its systems through a manufacturer change in the systems' OEM-specific BIOS. Thus, the i7-2600 would go no higher than its stock non-turbo 3.4GHz on that system no matter what. Sort of like buying a car powered by a V8 engine only to discover that the piston inside one of the engine's eight cylinders is busted.

Here is my personal experience with HP: The Hewlett-Packard Nightmare

I was actually contacted by them after one of their employees found the web page, but all I got from them was a runaround, which only confirms my resolve never to buy from HP again. Never, ever.

Herm, Adam makes an good point: You should insist that any system you buy have an OS installation disc.

Then, you should have an external hard drive for storing video, photos, etc.. You should store NOTHING on your C drive. If you do and you lose your data it is your fault! Ideally you should then back up everything to another (third drive).

Adam, it is surprising that someone with your knowledge did not have your data backed up to an external drive, at least once, if not twice. I imagine that wouldn't happen to you today.

My past experiences with HP customer support were positive, but they are very restrictive and follow policies to the letter. If you need great support, you need to buy a workstation. For top-shelf support Dell and HP offer very good warranty service when you buy a workstation. With one of my Dells they sent technicians out three times in a week to resolve an issue.

Low cost PCs have a small profit margin, so when you buy cheap you get cheap support. When you buy pro gear, they roll out the red carpet and take care of you.

Alas, I was so broke at the time I did not have an external drive. I have a number of drives in and out my computer now. Of course, the one I have now I built myself.

That HP computer died again the following year. Rather than going through the nonsense again, I started saving and built a new computer about four months later. I ripped out the hard drive from the HP and put it in the new computer, along with a new drive and an external drive. But I got a new case, power supply, motherboard, microprocessor, memory, DVD burner, diskette drive and video card.

That system was good for several years until the motherboard died several months ago, when I built my current i7 system. The two drives from that system are now external drives. My current system has two internal 1 TB SATA drives. I kept the case and power supply as well as my audio card. I also kept the DVD burner inside the computer, added a Blu-ray burner, plus have an additional external Blu-ray burner and several external drives (two 2 TB SATA drives, plus the drives from the old system), 24 GB RAM, a new nVidia card and a new 3D monitor. Plus Windows 7 Ultimate, 64-bit.

I also use Spinrite (GRC|Hard drive data recovery software) regularly to make sure my hard drives never fail. Haven't lost any data since I stopped dealing with HP.

I've read that the processor will render twice as fast as the i7. Even an inexpensive system with that chip would really rip through video. Preview performance would be pretty good, I would guess.

i'm never sure why people think that 1tb+ drives are a good thing....

my editing system (hdv, avchd, etc) has three drives - c: system with nothing else on it. d: work / data, e: video. c is a 320gb, the other 2 are 500gb NOT that any of them are anywhere used to their capacity (especially c: which was the smallest hd i could buy!).

raw footage goes to e:video, and when rendering is bounced between d: and e:.
d: also contains a library of useful data (music, docs, often used clips, etc.,) but NOT finished projects - they're off loaded to ex hd's (always 2, one in my keeping, the other in the clients / off site storage). these hd's are on a one to one project basis and contain EVERYTHING connected to the project including progressive veggies.

the very idea of putting all my eggs in one basket (ie. 1tb+ hd scares the hell out of me!).

as for the pc - i don't have clients sitting over my shoulder so my i7/920 / 6gb ram does everything i need it too, and reliably....

I filled my 2 TB drive over the Christmas season. Digital Juice had a big sale. I copied all their DVDs to that one drive and the drive is full. It is convenient to have it all in one place. And I do not risk scratching the DVDs. Plus, I only have three DVD drives (well, 1 DVD drive and 2 BD drives that can also read and write DVDs), but I have nine virtual drives, so I can mount nine ISOs at the same time. With Spinrite I do not have to worry about the disk crashing. And even if it did, I would just copy all those discs on a new 2 TB drive. Makes perfect sense to me.

I, too, use the C drive for the system and nothing else. Not even Vegas which I installed on drive D. "My Documents" is also on D. Any video project goes on an external eSATA disk of its own, plus gets backed up to another disk and on BD. Then it is pulled out of the external enclosure and stored.

The big drives cost the same as the small drives these days.

Leslie, video editors often need need large drives. I have 2TB drives myself, and many 1TB drives. I have 10 weddings waiting to be edited at this moment. I download the tapes the day of the wedding and then copy them to a backup drive. So I have 4TB worth of drives to hold projects awaiting processing. Then I move completed projects to the 2tb archival drive and back it up on another 2TB drive. I then delete the original footage to make room for the next shoot.

During my busy season I came perilously close to running out of space this past year, but I got through it. I will likely trade my eight 1TB drives for 2tb drives this year, as I never want to fill up my drives that much again.


It is the OS drive that needn't be larger than 60 or so GB for most folks. Smaller drives are more responsive. It is much less noticeable now with the newer drives, however. I admit this.

I would use some 1TB hard drives for my OS if necessary nowadays, they are so fast. The Samsungs, the Caviar Blacks, etc, they are really fast. On the other hand over time data gets so spread out over 1tb it is stupid, and defragmenting will only do so much after a while.

It happens with my small 150GB velociraptor. Every so often I zero out the drive and start from scratch and it's running super fast again. It's like storing a few needles in a warehouse. It will take longer to retrieve them cause there is so much ground to cover looking for them. Put those needles in a matchbox or other small container and you find them instantly.

i have to confess i hadn't thought about wedding / events - my most complex doco in the past three years only had 20 hours or so of footage - maybe 300gb - and i only ever work on one project at a time. i suppose with weddings (multicam as well), you could easily rack up a fair amount for each one, AND have a few queued for edit.....

Yeah Leslie, I used to average 120GB of footage per wedding, didn't take long to fill up a drive then.

I'm down to about 70-90GB per wedding now, as I've changed my shooting style...but still, when you add them up over time...

On the other hand, many hobbyists will buy the biggest and the best, fastest, etc. just for bragging rights so they can go into forums and boast. I've been guilty of that in the past myself. It is a stage some of us go through to make us feel better about ourselves. Harmless enough I suppose, but expensive.

Or you have folks that buy large drives and just fill them up with junk...entire collections of unedited digital photos they will never look at, or video they will never edit. I threw out most of my personal family video footage two years ago, and not once have I missed it. Edit what you need, put it on a DVD and be done with it, I say.